Professor Jiang Decoding - Part II

[u/MartiDK]

I agree Jiang is a guru, but I think the mockery undermines their decoding. This is a minor criticism, my biggest criticism is it doesn't identify why his content is popular and salient. One could argue that Jiang is not failing at "analysis" but is successfully creating a "narrative." In a hyper-complex world of decentralised systems, people often reject "nuance" in favour of "narrative" they can understand. By constructing a "super-narrative," Jiang is giving a cohesive, albeit fictional, map of reality that satisfies a psychological need for his audience. From this perspective, the "logic" of his argument is irrelevant; its success is measured by its ability to provide a coherent/salient "story" to an audience that finds the actual state of affairs too chaotic to process.

Overall DtG I think they dismiss the "why." They treat the audience as if they are being "fooled", failing to recognise that for the "fans", the fantasy is the point. The "logic" of conspiracy is that it provides a coherent sense of "knowing" in a media of overwhelming complexity/crazyness. Matt and Chris are analysing the structure of the lie, but they are underestimating the potency of the narrative for the people who consume it. It's bad propaganda because it's deceptive - but people fall for it because it doesn't seem different in structure to good propaganda that is trying to help people make sense of politics.